[–] hmimperialtortie 24 points (+24|-0)

1) “Trans” males do exactly that. You are men are paedophiles.

2) If girls are hypersexual it’s because they have been abused.

3) You are a nonce and deserve to be in men’s prison.

[–] shewolfoffrance 17 points (+17|-0)

Worth noting: attacking the "purity" of rape victims is an age-old tactic for bad men. And if little girls can't get tattoos or vote, they certainly can't meaningfully consent to sex, even if the man in question is wearing lipstick.

[–] queryings [OP] 17 points (+17|-0) Edited

Trans "activist" Alok Vaid-Menon's depraved comments (made under his FB alias, Darkmatter) have resurfaced.

Here is a screenshot of the full piece.

I will edit this comment with a transcript shortly.


The US routinely searches for new legal scapegoats to deposit its fears and anxieties around gender/sexual deviance. In the past, this has included the Witch Trials, sodomy laws, hyper-criminalization of suspected gay pedophilia in the late 20th century, and most recently dozens of state and local anti-trans bills across the country. While the face/identity of the alleged perpetrators have changed, the supposed puristy of the "victims" has remained quite stagnant. These days the narrative is that freaky transgender people (or as they say "crossdressers") will come into your bathrooms and abuse innocent little girls.

This type of legal/carceral culture relies on is two things: the construction of morally abhorrent perpetrators/scapegoats AND the production of pure, innocent victims. In this case, as in so many cases in the past, those victims are archetypical (white) (cis) innocent little girls. We totally need to challenge the white Christian supremacist, right-wing rhetoric around trans bodies, absolutely. But we also need to seriously overhaul the idea that there is a perfect victim anywhere.

I believe in the radical notion that little girls, like the rest of us, are complicated people. There are no fairy tales and no princesses here. Little girls are also queer, trans, kinky, deviant, kind, mean, beautiful, ugly, tremendous, and peculiar. Your kids aren't as straight and narrow as you think they are. Like everybody else. I've been a cute little girl. And a gender nonconforming young adult. Let me tell you, everywhere along that spectrum, I've been complicated and strange.

The 1973 horror flick "The Exorcist" is my favorite snapshot of the cultural place of (white) (cis) little girls. In the film, a little girl (with a single mother) is possessed by the devil. From another perspective, the little girl is actually exploring her sexuality (masturbation and so on) and her own demons/meanness. Obviously, (white) men from the church have to be brought in to save her since her single mom can't do it alone.

What if instead of moving from the "Exorcist" model of little girlhood, we moved from a place that acknowledged that no one is a perfect pure flower that can be corrupted. That everyone is at once capable of receiving and enacting violence, including little girls. That well give and receive violence to varying degrees, but that this is not a fairy tale. No one is purely good or evil. Look around: there are no princesses.

(Typed based off the screenshot linked; please let me know if you spot any errors not in the original text.)

[–] WatcherattheGates 18 points (+18|-0)

"I've been a cute little girl." Uh-huh.

[–] jvsmine 12 points (+12|-0)

like I sincerely fucking doubt that ugly hairy perverted clown has ever been 'cute' let alone a 'little girl'. what a sick fuck.

[–] bunyip 12 points (+12|-0)

Translation: "I have a fetish of being sexually assaulted in the bathroom and wish it had happened to me."

From another perspective, the little girl is actually exploring her sexuality (masturbation and so on) and her own demons/meanness.

When she shoves the crucifix into her young girl vagina, that is maybe the most horrifying thing in the whole film, a film of projectile vomit and her head spinning around 360. I thought that was the most sick disturbing thing the author could come up with (and late 60s, early 70s movie violence during the Vietnam era was like people were numb from the nightly news, so film had to be extreme to get attention -- ewww. And when I read the book I actually had a nightmare right after where I was levitating and let me tell you I was TERRIFIED). I never once thought "oh she's exploring her sexuality."

[–] TerfSedai 15 points (+15|-0)

So sayeth Princess Alok, the one true princess to rule them all.

[–] [Deleted] 9 points (+9|-0)

Did this grown man just say little girls are...kinky??!? 🤮🤮🤮

[–] RisingUp 6 points (+6|-0) Edited

This dude: Trans people aren't going to rape little girls in bathrooms! Oh btw did you know that little girls are totes kinky and deviant? I think about the sexuality of little girls a lot! Just ask me about my thoughts on The Exorcist! Anyway, I know all about being a little girl from all the times I've masturbated while pretending to be one, which is exactly the same as really being a little girl, and I can tell you, little girls are absolutely gagging for it. So now do you see how stupid it is to think that trans people are going to rape little girls in bathrooms? If anything, little girls are going to rape me.

[–] BurnBooker 5 points (+5|-0)

Counterpoint... true princesses were routinely raped and sold into marriage.

[–] womenopausal [speaking as mod] witch babe 4 points (+4|-0)

Meme/image content should go in /o/Radfemmery, as a rule. Just letting you know for next time.

[–] queryings [OP] 2 points (+2|-0)

Sorry about that! I’ll be sure to not make the same mistake again. Thanks for letting me know.

[–] womenopausal witch babe 2 points (+2|-0)

No worries! The circle system takes a bit of getting used to.

[–] [Deleted] 3 points (+3|-0)

Is this person actually using the argument that because "girls are kinky" (WTF?!), TIMs have the right to go into the bathrooms and abuse them? Is that actually what this says?

From what I understand, children do have a sexuality, but it's incomplete/ still being created, just like the children themselves are. Adults should never be involved in a child's sexuality in any way, and anyone who thinks they should is a PEDOPHILE. This is insane.

[–] dasehe 1 points (+1|-0)
  1. If your position commits you to the claim that any man in a dress is a transwoman, because you cannot police gender identities, then yes, this is true by definition, because your definition is fucking awful.

  2. Regardless of whether little girls are exploring their sexuality or are 'deviant', all of this misses the fucking point. Little girls cannot consent. If little girls cannot consent, it is rape. Stop justifying rape and stop trying to colour it with 'it's complicated.' It really isn't. Do we have to go over how rape is bad again?

Load more (2 comments)